DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed 12/10/2025.
Claims 1-9 and 11-16 have been amended.
Claims 1-16 remain pending and have been considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 5, and 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP2010198307A to Osawa.
Per claim 1, Osawa teaches a vehicle electronic control device comprising:
a microcomputer having a non-volatile memory that is capable of storing software including a program and data and includes a first area and a second area as memory areas, and a control unit that includes a first core and a second core and executes a rewrite program for rewriting the software with at least one of the first core and the second core (see at least FIGS. 2 & 5); and
an external storage provided within a vehicle and outside the microcomputer, the external storage being directly connected to the microcomputer and configured to temporarily store storing reprogramming data for updating the software (see FIG. 5; see also page 5 “…when the processor core 51c communicates with the server 6 and determines a write request for update data, the processor core 51c downloads the update data and temporarily stores it in its own memory (EEPROM 53c)…”);
wherein the control unit rewrites the software stored in the non-volatile memory by using a memory area of the external storage in a case where it is determined, based on specification data, that the software stored in the non- volatile memory of the microcomputer is to be rewritten (see page 5 “…when starting from writing to the processor core 51a, the determination of the validity by the above-described mutual comparison is stopped…Therefore, the processor core 51c writes the update data in the memory (EEPROM 53c) of the processor core 51a according to the update control program…“).
Per claim 5, Osawa further teaches
wherein: the external storage is capable of executing the rewrite program; and the control unit copies the rewrite program to the external storage, executes the rewrite program in the external storage, writes the reprogramming data stored in the external storage into the non-volatile memory to generate rewritten software in the non- volatile memory, and thus rewrites the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer (see at least page 5, “…processor cores 51c that are not used for comparison of calculation results (the operation amount calculation of the automatic transmission 3 is not performed) are allocated for update control, and the processor core 51c The update control program is stored in the memory (EEPROM 53c). When there is a request to write update data of program / control data, the processor core 51c causes the update data to be written to the processor cores 51a and 51b individually and in time series…”).
Per claim 7, Osawa further teaches
wherein: the reprogramming data stored in the external storage is able to be written into the non-volatile memory during activation (see at least FIG. 5; see also page 5 “…when the processor core 51c communicates with the server 6 and determines a write request for update data, the processor core 51c downloads the update data and temporarily stores it in its own memory (EEPROM 53c)…”); and
the control unit executes the rewrite program with at least one of the first core and the second core, writes the reprogramming data stored in the external storage into the non-volatile memory to generate rewritten software in the non-volatile memory, and thus rewrites the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer (see at least page 5 “…when starting from writing to the processor core 51a, the determination of the validity by the above-described mutual comparison is stopped, the calculation result on the processor core 51b side is output to the automatic transmission 3, and the processor core 51a The processor core 51b is brought into a state in which the shift operation and the like of the automatic transmission 3 are controlled without using the calculation result. As a result, the processor core 51a is disconnected from the control of the automatic transmission 3. Therefore, the processor core 51c writes the update data in the memory (EEPROM 53c) of the processor core 51a according to the update control program…”).
Per claim 8, Osawa further teaches
wherein: rewritten software stored in the external storage is able to be written into the non-volatile memory during activation; and the control unit executes the rewrite program with at least one of the first core and the second core to generate the rewritten software in the external storage, writes the generated rewritten software into the non-volatile memory, and thus rewrites the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer (see at least page 5 “…when starting from writing to the processor core 51a, the determination of the validity by the above-described mutual comparison is stopped, the calculation result on the processor core 51b side is output to the automatic transmission 3, and the processor core 51a The processor core 51b is brought into a state in which the shift operation and the like of the automatic transmission 3 are controlled without using the calculation result. As a result, the processor core 51a is disconnected from the control of the automatic transmission 3. Therefore, the processor core 51c writes the update data in the memory (EEPROM 53c) of the processor core 51a according to the update control program…”).
Per claim 9, Osawa further teaches
the control unit executes the rewrite program with one of the first core and the second core, rewrites software in a memory area corresponding to a core in which the rewrite program is not stored out of the first area and the second area of the non-volatile memory, executes the rewrite program with the other of the first core and the second core, rewrites the software in the memory area corresponding to the core in which the rewrite program is not stored out of the first area and the second area of the non-volatile memory, and thus rewrites the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer (see at least FIG. 5; see also page 5 “…when starting from writing to the processor core 51a, the determination of the validity by the above-described mutual comparison is stopped…Therefore, the processor core 51c writes the update data in the memory (EEPROM 53c) of the processor core 51a according to the update control program…“).
Per claim 10, Osawa further teaches
wherein: the microcomputer is defined as a first microcomputer; the vehicle electronic control device further comprises a second microcomputer having a non-volatile memory including a memory area capable of storing software including a program and data, and a control unit including a core; the first microcomputer is configured to directly communicate with the external storage via a dedicated line; and the second microcomputer is configured to communicate with the external storage via the first microcomputer (see at least FIG. 5).
Per claim 11, Osawa further teaches
wherein; the control unit determines, based on data acquired from the outside, that the first area or the second area is rewritten, and determines, based on the specification data, that the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer is to be rewritten (see at least page 3 “First, when the ignition switch 54c is turned on and the process proceeds to step S201, it is determined whether there is a program switching request, that is, whether update data of the program has been downloaded and there is a request to start control according to the downloaded update program…”).
Per claim 12, Osawa further teaches
wherein; the control unit makes a request for an approval for activation, and rewrites the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer based on condition that the activation being approved (see at least page 4 “…a program switching request is acquired together with a download request for update data during operation. it is determined whether it is requested to immediately switch to control based on the downloaded update data…”).
Per claim 13, Osawa further teaches
wherein. the control unit rewrites the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer while the vehicle is traveling (see at least page 4 “…even if it is instructed to apply the downloaded update data immediately, if the driving state at that time is not suitable for execution of switching, such as during high-speed driving or right / left turn, switching The execution can be deferred, and the switch to the update program can be executed after the vehicle is running straight at a low speed or when the automobile 1 is stopped…”).
Per claim 14, Osawa teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a rewrite program causing a control unit of a vehicle electronic control device including a microcomputer having a non-volatile memory that is capable of storing software including a program and data and includes a first area and a second area as memory areas, and the control unit that includes a first core and a second core and executes a rewrite program for rewriting the software with at least one of the first core and the second core, and an external storage provided within a vehicle and outside the microcomputer, the external storage being directly connected to the microcomputer and configured to temporarily store reprogramming data for updating the software, to execute (see FIG. 5; see also page 5 “…when the processor core 51c communicates with the server 6 and determines a write request for update data, the processor core 51c downloads the update data and temporarily stores it in its own memory (EEPROM 53c)…”):
a first procedure of determining, based on specification data, whether or not the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer is to be rewritten (see at least page 5 “when the processor core 51c communicates with the server 6 and determines a write request for update data…”); and
a second procedure of rewriting the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer by using a memory area of the external storage in a case where itis determined that the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer is to be rewritten in the first procedure (see page 5 “…when starting from writing to the processor core 51a, the determination of the validity by the above-described mutual comparison is stopped…Therefore, the processor core 51c writes the update data in the memory (EEPROM 53c) of the processor core 51a according to the update control program…“).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2010198307A to Osawa in view of JP2006171803A to Yamaguchi.
Per claim 2, Osawa further teaches:
an internal storage that is provided inside the microcomputer separately from the non-volatile memory, the first core, and the processor second core, and that is capable of executing a program (see at least FIG. 2; see also at least page 1 “…a multi-core processor 53 having two or more processor cores 51a, 51b. Each of the processor cores 51 includes a CPU 53a, a RAM 53b, and an EEPROM 53c…”).
Osawa does not explicitly teach:
wherein, in a case where it is determined, based on the specification data, that the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer is to be rewritten, the control unit copies the rewrite program to the internal storage and executes the rewrite program in the internal storage.
Yamaguchi teaches an analogous art relates to program rewrite system for vehicle, comprising:
wherein, in a case where it is determined, based on specification data, that software stored in non-volatile memory of the microcomputer is to be rewritten, a control unit copies a rewrite program to the internal storage and executes the rewrite program in the internal storage (see at least page 9, paragraph 3 “…copy the rewrite control program in the non-volatile memory to the working memory area. Then, the rewriting process may be performed by starting a rewriting control program in the copied working memory area…”).
It would have been obvious for a person of an ordinary skilled in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Osawa to incorporate the teaching of Yamaguchi to copy the rewrite program from the non-volatile memory to a working memory area (i.e. RAM) for quick access for rewriting. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a quick access to the program for rewriting and to enable the CPU to perform rewrite process efficiently.
Per claim 3, Osawa further teaches:
an internal storage that is provided inside the microcomputer separately from the non-volatile memory, the first core, and the processor second core, and that is capable of executing a program (see at least FIG. 2; see also at least page 1 “…a multi-core processor 53 having two or more processor cores 51a, 51b. Each of the processor cores 51 includes a CPU 53a, a RAM 53b, and an EEPROM 53c…”).
Osawa does not explicitly teach:
wherein a control unit copies a rewrite program to an internal storage, executes the rewrite program in the internal storage, writes the reprogramming data stored in the external storage into the non-volatile memory to generate rewritten software in the non-volatile memory, and thus rewrites the software stored in the non- volatile memory of the microcomputer.
Yamaguchi teaches an analogous art relates to program rewrite system for vehicle, comprising:
control unit copies the rewrite program to the internal storage, executes the rewrite program in the internal storage, writes reprogramming data stored in the external storage into the non-volatile memory to generate rewritten software in the non-volatile memory, and thus rewrites the software stored in the non- volatile memory of the microcomputer (see at least page 9, paragraph 3 “…copy the rewrite control program in the non-volatile memory to the working memory area. Then, the rewriting process may be performed by starting a rewriting control program in the copied working memory area…”).
It would have been obvious for a person of an ordinary skilled in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Osawa to incorporate the teaching of Yamaguchi to copy the rewrite program from the non-volatile memory to a working memory area (i.e. RAM) for quick access for rewriting. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a quick access to the program for rewriting to enble the CPU to perform rewrite process efficiently.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2010198307A to Osawa in view of U.S. Patent No. 5012404 to Pressprich.
Per claim 16, Osawa teaches a vehicle electronic control device comprising:
a microcomputer having a non-volatile memory that is capable of storing software including a program and data and includes a first area and a second area as memory areas, and a processor that includes a first core and a second core and executes a rewrite program for rewriting the software with at least one of the first core and the second core (see at least FIG. 5); and
an external storage provided within a vehicle and outside the microcomputer, the external storage being directly connected to the microcomputer and configured to temporarily store storing reprogramming data for updating the software (see FIG. 5; see also page 5 “…when the processor core 51c communicates with the server 6 and determines a write request for update data, the processor core 51c downloads the update data and temporarily stores it in its own memory (EEPROM 53c)…”); and
wherein a memory area of the non-volatile memory and a memory area of the external storage are used as a pseudo-double-bank memory, causing the software stored in the non-volatile memory of the microcomputer to be rewritten (see page 5 “…when starting from writing to the processor core 51a, the determination of the validity by the above-described mutual comparison is stopped…Therefore, the processor core 51c writes the update data in the memory (EEPROM 53c) of the processor core 51a according to the update control program…“).
Osawa does not explicitly teach
wherein a memory area of the non-volatile memory and a memory area of the external storage are used as a pseudo-double-bank memory.
Pressprich teaches an analogous art relates to pseudo-double bank memory, comprising:
a memory area of a non-volatile memory and a memory area of an external storage are used as a pseudo-double-bank memory (see at least col.6, lines 52-67 “A feature of the invention is that the memory is pseudo dual port, rather than true dual port. It is therefore necessary to resolve contention between the controller and the CPU for memory access…”).
It would have been obvious for a person of an ordinary skilled in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Osawa to incorporate the teaching of Pressprich to use Pseudo dual port memory. One would have been motivated to use Pseudo dual port memory in order to provide access speed, simultaneous operations, and reduce cost.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 is allowed.
Claims 4 & 6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 14 and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILLIP H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1070. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Wei Zhen can be reached at (571) 272-3708. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PHILLIP H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2191